# data[].attributes.body
Contact YoUthROC for training or co-research needs. Find us at the Robert J. Jones Urban Research Outreach Engagement Center (UROC) in north Minneapolis.
See link for team member bios: https://padlet.com/romba005/YoUthROC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
YoUthROC is a community and University-connected youth research team that supports the growth of Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) and is committed to youth, kinship, and racial justice in education. The team centers Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) youth and other marginalized communities. YoUthROC is an affiliate program to the University of Minnesota's Robert J. Jones Urban Research and Outreach-Engagement Center (UROC) in North Minneapolis and the Department of Curriculum and Instruction.
The team aims to:

1. Provide support and training for anti-racist, justice-oriented youth research;

2. Conduct YPAR projects that center and showcase the power of BIPOC youth through accessible and culturally relevant research methods;

3. Model kinship, nourish connections, and sustain reciprocal community partnerships; and

4. Reclaim Northside spaces and return them to spaces that serve the community's BIPOC youth.

We are guided by words of elder, scholar, author and civil rights leader Josie R. Johnson:
For the ancestors who struggled for me
For the future generations for whom I struggle
Always in love and always for justice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
YoUthROC is a community and University-connected youth research team that supports the growth of Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) and is committed to youth, kinship, and racial justice in education. The team centers Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) youth and other marginalized communities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Recognizing the Dakota and the Anishinaabe Peoples and the stolen land / unceded territories on which we live

# data[].attributes.subject
Recognizing the Dakota and the Anishinaabe Peoples and the stolen land / unceded territories on which we live

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Minneapolis-Saint Paul metropolitan area is home to one of the largest and most tribally diverse urban American Indian populations, numbering well over 35,000. The size of the Twin Cities' indigenous population boomed as a result of the 1956 Indian Relocation Act which defunded many reservation services and paid for relocation expenses to the cities in an attempt to assimilate the country's indigenous peoples. Across the country, roughly 7 out of 10 American Indians now live in cities.

The native community of Minneapolis is comprised of many nations, the largest being the Dakhóta (Dakota), whose cultural history begins at the confluence of the Minnesota and Mississippi Rivers, a sacred place they call Bdóte, and the Anishinaabeg (Ojibwe), whose homelands extend northward from the city.

About 45% of Minneapolis' American Indian population lives in poverty. The famed American Indian Movement, founded in Minneapolis in 1968, originally grew out of the concerns of the city's urban American Indian community such as poverty, racism, police harassment, and substandard housing.

It's with this background in mind that we present this map, The Twin Cities in Dakhóta, Anishinaabemowin, and English. Both Dakhóta and Anishinaabe cultures have a long history in this region, even before urbanization and the Indian Relocation Act, and their place names for features on the land and water are the perfect illustration of that. Restoring indigenous place names is already a hot topic in Minneapolis, where plans to drop the name Lake Calhoun (named after a pro-slavery senator) in favor of the Dakhóta name, Bde Maka Ska, has been met with controversy. A group calling itself "Save Lake Calhoun" claims that "Lake Calhoun is the first victim of what will be a tsunami of extremist name-change advocacy," and that restoring the Dakhóta name will "Erase [the lake] from our history forever." The irony of their objection, of course, is that this small gesture is only undoing the earlier erasure of indigenous history.

Place name knowledge contributed by Ethan Neerdaels of the Dakhóta Iápi Okhódakičhiye (Dakota Language Society) and Charlie Lippert of the Misi-zaaga'igani Anishinaabeg (Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe). Map by Jordan Engel of the Decolonial Atlas. The Twin Cities in Dakhóta, Anishinaabemowin, and English can be reused under the Decolonial Media License 0.1.

References:
1. https://www.maicnet.org/about/
2. https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/news/business/from-reservations-to-urban-centers-indians-struggle-to-escape-poverty-fight-to-create-positive-change/
3. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/native-americans-minneapolis/503441/
4. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/minnesota-residents-seek-to-stop-lake-calhoun-name-change/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Minneapolis-St. Paul in Dakota and Ojibwe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Minneapolis-Saint Paul metropolitan area is home to one of the largest and most tribally diverse urban American Indian populations, numbering well over 35,000. The size of the Twin Cities' indigenous population boomed as a result of the 1956 Indian Relocation Act which defunded many reservation services and paid for relocation expenses to the cities...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the original research proposal, this project's main objective was defined as understanding the experiences of three different stakeholder groups at Faribault High School: Latinx and Somali high school students, their parents, and the teachers who work with those students. The project sought to have the stakeholder groups define, explore, and understand both the challenges they face and the assets they possess, as a way to move away from deficit-focused understandings and solutions while maintaining a focus on documented disparities in racial minority students' educational experiences and outcomes. The work done by the various community research teams in collaboration with the Carleton College team and district and high school staff has foregrounded the needs, concerns, strengths, and assets of the Latinx and Somali communities as the school district works to ensure that their schools are providing all students with an equitable education.

One main result of utilizing a PAR framework, as the original CNCS Community Conversations application required, has been an incredible shift in how parents, students, and community members view themselves in relation to the school district. This shift has been particularly dramatic within the Latinx parent team because the team has been able to continue their work beyond Year 1 and into Year 2 with the same members, thus deepening their connections with each other, with Carleton, and with high school administrators.

Effective communication within and across stakeholder groups emerged as a key factor and challenge in shifting school, community, and individual practices to more effectively support Latinx and Somali students and families in Faribault. The Latinx parent team especially have insisted that parents should be involved more completely in the decisions that the school makes about and for their children. When the school sought their advice about the new program, RISE, for example, the parents spoke about how a similar support program in Northfield often left parents out of conversations. The parent research team expressed very strongly their desire to be informed and educated about what support and advice is being given to their children by school personnel. As one member put it, "Who else knows our children better than us, as parents? Sadly, here, our youth complete 18 years and already they're of legal age for the society. But before they turn 18, many of them don't have the sufficient maturity to choose or determine the right school, the career." The high school administrators have taken substantial steps to improve communication between the school and Latinx and Somali parents, though there are still improvements to be made. For example, it took the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic for the school district to develop video guides in Spanish and Somali to help parents access the district's online parent portal. However, effective communication remains a challenge, and the Latinx parent team is particularly concerned about some key personnel changes at the high school and the school district.

Shifting the perspectives of staff and administrators at the high school and the school district has also emerged as another key challenge. Much of the work being done by the various community teams in collaboration with the Carleton co-PIs has been about coming to "recognize the resilience, ingenuity, and agency that have existed among young people and their families from nondominant communities" (Ishimaru, 2020, p. 1). Even with the best of intentions, most school efforts to "engage" parents defaults to deficit views about nondominant parents, about needing to "educate" them about the American school system, and this attitude can lead to families feeling "judged by educators and find[ing] their cultural practices, values, and priorities disregarded or even denigrated" (p. 3). For example, at a December 2020 meeting with staff in the RISE program, a staff member at a local non-profit organization collaborating with the program talked about parents and students in deficit ways, such as making assumptions about how students lie to their parents and alleging that parents have no idea what's happening. While the community members and the co-PIs have worked to shift such deficit views, these views remain prevalent. At most, parents are asked about their experiences but not about their expertise. As Ishimaru notes, however, "an equitable collaboration approach begins from the premise that nondominant families (which includes young people themselves, their caregivers, and extended relations) represent a largely untapped source of expertise and leadership for achieving educational equity and justice" (p. 4)

Ishimaru argues that "Only when we initiate educational change with nondominant families and communities-and center their priorities, concerns, expertise, knowledge, and resources (rather than that of the system, or of white, middle-class parents or educators)-can we being to counter the status quo normative assumptions in the system about what and who matter" (p. 51). While the PAR project has attempted to make this case and put this idea into practice, the co-PIs don't know that the school officials really have taken this idea to heart in how they operate day-to-day or in how they make decisions. At least at the current moment, most of the work that the district is doing "to improve family engagement" has been limited to attempts "to build relationships or foster more welcoming climates without any fundamental change from the assumptions underlying the conventional deficiency paradigm of 'fixing' young people and their families" (p. 55). Additionally, as Bertrand & Lozenski note, if the goal of a research project is policy change, "we need to rethink the assumption that simply disseminating findings and recommendations will trigger change" (p. 8).

The work enabled by this grant has demonstrated the necessity of supporting students and parents of color to develop research community organizing skills that enable them to have a powerful voice in Faribault schools, rather than relying solely on the school district's willingness and ability to collaborate effectively with parents and youth.

The project's reach and potential was severely impacted by the ongoing COVID pandemic. Minnesota's communities of color were disproportionately affected by the pandemic, which was reflected in the health and other challenges faced by many of the Somali and Latinx community members who were involved in this work. Several team members and their family members contracted the virus and some were severely ill themselves or had to take care of family members who became severely ill. Black, Latinx, Asian, and Indigenous people in the state tested positive, were hospitalized, and died from COVID at higher rates compared to white Minnesotans (Minnesota Department of Health, n.d.). The pandemic slowed down the work of the community teams both because of these health challenges and because of technical challenges. For example, only two members of the Latinx parent team had access to computers, which made it very challenging to organize and participate in online meetings. The Carleton co-PIs did their best to meet immediate needs, including providing computers and technical assistance, to support the teams in being able to continue their work.

For the Carleton co-PIs, it was both exciting and logistically difficult to support several community teams at the same time, especially as the Carleton team has tried to provide materials and resources in three languages (English, Spanish, and Somali). Conversations with other AmeriCorps grantees (including the Smith College, University of Cincinnati, and University of Wisconsin-Whitewater teams) made it clear that our project has elements that make sense for our context and made it a logistically complicated project. For example, compared to Smith College (the only other small liberal arts college among the grantees), Carleton is working with both adults and minors and with community organizations that are new and not well-resourced. The co-PIs have also realized how valuable it has been to have Carleton team members who can at least understand Spanish when comparing experiences supporting the two parent teams. (The Carleton team members lack even a basic knowledge of Somali.)

The lack of Somali fluency on the part of the Carleton team greatly impacted the work we could do with the Somali parents in Faribault. The external evaluation of the Somali parent team in Year 1 made it clear that the parent-researchers did not see "participatory action research" as the framework driving the work they did. There was clear confusion about the distinction between parents as researchers and parents as participants, even on the part of the external evaluator. It was helpful, though, to have the external evaluation report because it indicated clearly that the Somali parent research team's occasional resistance and reluctance to the research collaboration stemmed centrally from a deep-seated sense of skepticism that anything would change in the school district. It was also clear that the Somali community in Faribault already had strong community connections and networks, because of the community mosque and the Somali Community Resettlement Services office.

Logistics on the Carleton side, especially around paying the community researchers, has been a steep challenge throughout the three years of the project, taking up many hours of the CCCE staff time, including those who did not initially have direct responsibility for this project. The co-PIs have learned that the kind of deep, collaborative relationships between community members and the college staff and the kind of centering of community-identified needs seems quite different than the relationships imagined in academic civic engagement class projects or in volunteer work by students. Carleton College, and universities in general, have to make changes to the way they do business when it comes to supporting community-based research projects and it often takes longer than the cycle of one grant to make these changes.

Another challenge that the project has faced over the three years is personnel changes both at Carleton and in Faribault. The project's first co-PI, Amel Gorani, who initiated the project, left at the end of the first year, and Emily Oliver took over as the co-PI. Oliver was able to build strong relationships with the community members in Faribault over the next two years. While her strong relationships supported a more robust relationship between Faribault and Carleton beyond the grant period, she also left Carleton at the end of the third grant year. However, relationships that were built during her time have continued to be fostered by the new staff-for example, Latinx parent researcher Cynthia Gonzalez has lead training sessions about university-community relationships for students working at the CCCE for the past three years.

On the Faribault side, both of the high school's assistant principals as well as the counselor who facilitated the YPAR team during Year 3 have left their positions. While co-PI Chikkatur and many of the community team members were initially worried about these transitions, these changes do provide the opportunity to think about maintaining long-term relationships between institutions and communities despite changes in personnel. One of the biggest challenges faced by projects such as this PAR project is how to create the conditions for structural changes that often take years to design and implement and personnel and policy changes are occurring regularly. Working through the inevitable changes in the personnel who are involved has to be a part of the answer to this challenge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the original research proposal, this project's main objective was defined as understanding the experiences of three different stakeholder groups at Faribault High School: Latinx and Somali high school students, their parents, and the teachers who work with those students.

# data[].attributes.body
Adopting Critical Praxis

Step 1: Identify a problem.

Step 2: Research the problem.

Step 3: Develop a collective plan of action to address the problem.

Step 4: Implement the collective plan of action.

Step 5: Evaluate the action, assess its efficacy, and reexamine the state of the problem.

Pedraza, E., & Rodríguez, R. J. (2018). " We Are Not Dirt": Freirean Counternarratives and Rhetorical Literacies for Student Voice in Schooling. English Journal, 107(6), 75-81.

# data[].attributes.body
It will positively impact the experience of students in middle and high schools, who will experience research in active, just, and participatory ways (Mirra, Filipiak, & Garcia, 2015).

Mirra, N., Filipiak, D., & Garcia, A. (2015). Revolutionizing inquiry in urban English classrooms: Pursuing voice and justice through youth participatory action research. English Journal, 105(2), 49.

For more information, see attached.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
View this discussion with members of the Council of Youth Research, a Los Angeles youth participatory action research (YPAR) community, on how this practice makes civic education authentic, relevant, and oriented toward social justice.

This is Part 2 of a 4-part series, Youth Led Inquiry, Connection and Action: Redesigning Civic Education for Participatory Politics, which focuses on successes and lessons learned from two long-running civic education initiatives that redesign civic learning opportunities to take advantage of digital opportunities for connection and social action, the Educating for Participatory Politics project, and the Council of Youth Research.

Part 1: Supporting Educators to Educate for Participatory Politics

Part 3: Educators' Experiences Educating for Participatory Politics

Part 4: Thinking Across Civic Education Work

View the Conversation
During the broadcast, the conversation also took place on Twitter using the hashtags #connectedlearning and #digitalcivics and through the Q&A feature in the video player.
Guests for this webinar included:

Nicole Mirra (host), Assistant Professor of English Education at The University of Texas at El Paso. She earned her Ph.D. in Urban Schooling from the UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies, is a former high school Language Arts teacher, and coordinator of UCLA Council of Youth Research.

Ebony Cain, Associate Professor of Clinical Education at the USC Rossier School of Education.

Antonio Martinez, Assistant Professor in the Department of Student Development in the College of Education at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Katie Rainge-Briggs, Founding teacher of the Augustus Hawkins Responsible Indigenous Social Entrepreneurship (RISE) High School in Los Angeles, California.

Laurence Tan, Founding teacher at the Roses in Concrete Community School in Oakland, California.

Resources for this webinar:
Photo/ Council of Youth Research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
YPAR in Action: Lessons from the Council of Youth Research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Educator Innovator and its partners share the goal of creating more powerful and connected learning for youth through bringing together learning and leadership opportunities for teachers, youth workers, mentors, librarians, and museum educators that are open, re-mixable, and typically free or low-cost.

# data[].attributes.body
YPAR Hub at Berkeley. THIS IS A GIANT RESOURCE that includes handouts and lesson plans. The plan linked here is: "Defining an Issue and a Research Question"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Objectives

To identify the issue of interest to be researched

Materials

"What Makes a Good Research Question?" handout (1 per participant)

"Identification of the Issue" handout (1 per participant)

Relevant data (optional)

Scrap paper

Pens or pencils

Flip chart paper

Markers

Prepare Before

N/A

Warm Up

Let the participants know that you are about to decide, as a group, what the topic for research will be. It is important for everyone to participate in this activity so they can have a say in the project, which the group will be working on for the remainder of its time together. Start by walking the group through the "What Makes a Good Research Question?" handout. Discuss that answerable questions only address one idea:

They look at relationships and not causes and effects.

They are clear and concise.

They can be easily understood.

They are manageable to answer in a couple of months.

Experience

STEP 1: Deciding what the research topic will be

Present the question to the group, and have participants write down three answers individually on a piece of paper. Your question can be very general, such as "What are some issues that are important to teens?" or can be more tailored to the purposes of your program or funding requirements, such as "What are some physical health issues that are important to teens in Oakland?" or "What are some education issues that are important to Oakland High School students?" It is important to keep the question as open as possible so that teens can come to an issue that is truly theirs to research, rather than adults telling them what the problem is. This is crucial to establishing youth ownership of the project and getting teens invested in the process of research. Note that you can use data or school or community assessments (e.g., Oregon Healthy Teens data) to help the group identify priority issues.

STEP 2: Suggesting research topics

Ask the participants to share one of the topics identified on their list. Go around the room, listing each topic, exactly as they are said, on a flip chart, whiteboard, or chalkboard. Once you have gotten a contribution from everyone in the room, ask people to share any other topics that have not yet been listed. Next take a few minutes to try to combine any topics together. Ask for suggestions from the group and make sure that whoever thought of the initial suggestions agrees with the way it is being renamed or incorporated into a broader category, to ensure that no one's thoughts or ideas are lost.

STEP 3: Selecting the research topics

Once you have a list of topics that everyone agrees on, split the group into teams of two. Have each team select the two topics it feels are the most important from the list. Have the team fill out the handout "Identification of the Issue" for each item they choose.

Reflect

Have each team present the two topics chosen, explaining to the rest of the group why the team members think the issues they chose are the most important. Once a topic has been chosen, have any other team who chose it report on it as well, so that you can have a running record of each topic selected. Once all the groups have shared their selections, create a new listing of the topics chosen by teams in Step 3.

Summarize

The final step is to negotiate and decide on a topic for research. There may be choices that seem fairly obvious because a majority of people selected them. The facilitator should try to get the group to think about how easy or difficult it will be to research certain topics. There also may be relationships between items on the list that the facilitator should point out. It is recommended that each group work on one topic/problem even if it is difficult to get resolution or agreement within the group, because:

It builds group identity.

There are more people to work on different facets of the problem.

It doesn't split the staff between two projects.

It is easier to schedule learning activities.

It is much easier to identify enough key adults for youth to interview if there is only one topic to consider.

If the group can't come to agreement through discussion, voting can work. Ways to vote are:

Hands up for one versus the other topic

Written secret vote

Youth participants generally find it more important to work with their peers than to compete over topics and are satisfied with the resolution no matter what process is used to arrive at it. A useful way to deal with disagreement in the group is to show how a topic members want to include may be an important part of the research model as an independent rather than a dependent variable. In other words, it can be a cause of the problem rather than the problem itself. This means that to change the problem, the cause itself has to be changed or improved.

Demonstrate

Once the group has come to a decision on the final research questions, congratulate everyone! Thank everyone for their openness, honesty and willingness to work together. They have just completed a very important step of their action research journey!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To identify the issue of interest to be researched "What Makes a Good Research Question?" handout (1 per participant) "Identification of the Issue" handout (1 per participant) Relevant data (optional) Scrap paper Pens or pencils Flip chart paper Markers N/A Let the participants know that you are about to decide, as a group, what the topic for research will be.

# data[].attributes.body
http://d4bl.org/ and article attached.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Data for Black Lives conference, held in January at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, highlighted the many ways in which data interact with the lives of black people. From facial recognition technology to algorithms that predict criminal risk, data and technology can often feel like an unseen and unfamiliar force used to criminalize and disempower black people.

At the conference, I was struck by the many ways in which brilliant black researchers were flipping this notion on its head; yes, data and technology can reinforce existing disparities, but it can also illuminate the world around us and build power and agency among people who are traditionally shut out of decision-making.

This same sense of power and agency can be transmitted to communities that rarely engage with data-or at least the sort of quantitative data that many researchers engage with. There are many ways to engage communities around research findings including online data tools, community meetings, and presentations. However, there are fewer examples for how to directly involve the community in generating and processing data. This is certainly not for lack of interest; my conversations with civically-minded researchers often revolve around how to involve community members more deeply in their research.

Researchers can be unfamiliar with working in the community, and the notion of involving community members directly in the process can be daunting. How do you start? And what about data quality?

One model for engaging the community in data collection - community mapping - is a relatively low barrier entry point. I will discuss one example that typifies this strategy: the DC Preservation Network. Keep in mind that community mapping is just one of a number of ways to engage community members in the nuts and bolts of research - for example, others include community-based participatory research and data walks.
What is Community Mapping?
Community mapping is a process by which volunteers from the community collect spatial data on their neighborhood or city. The data can be on vacant or blighted housing, sidewalk or roadway conditions, or flood damage-really any data that has a spatial component. It engages community members in tracking and creating data about the neighborhoods in which they live. At the end of the process communities can literally see themselves in the data.

Community members may collect primary data and eventually be able to link it with existing administrative or survey data. One such project, Motor City Mapping, ran from 2013 to 2017 and engaged over 150 volunteers in a project to map blighted properties in Detroit. The project used an app that allowed volunteers to document residential and commercial property conditions. These data fed into a centralized database for quality control. Data Driven Detroit then linked the collected data to over 20 other data sets to inform Detroit's overall strategy to reduce blight in the city.

Community mapping carries the added benefit of providing a potentially novel source of data that can be valuable beyond the ability to engage community members. Community mapping can generate data that are not currently released by the city or that have unique variables that the city may not have available. For example, the technique has been used to develop data on open gas stations after natural disasters as well as mapping the state of sidewalks near schools.
Community Mapping in Action
The DC Preservation Network, a project co-sponsored by the Coalition of Non-Profit Housing and Economic Development and the Urban Institute, works to pair on-the-ground expertise with parcel-level housing data. The Urban Institute provides data on at-risk housing using data integrated from multiple sources at the federal and local level. These data are then shared with local policymakers, housing officials, housing organizers, and community members living in the units themselves.

Sharing data with the community provides crucial context to help decide which buildings are most at-risk of losing their affordability. For example, the community might help us answer questions we don't see in the federal and local data, such as: Is this unit owned by an owner with a history of selling off subsidized buildings? Is the building currently involved in a court case? Have the tenants in this building created a tenant organization? Advocates and organizers also benefit from closer familiarity with the data collection process, learning what building data is available and better targeting their scarce resources.

These questions provide vital context that underlying parcel data alone could never provide. The DC Preservation Network relies on researchers compiling administrative data and presenting it to community members to add, correct, and provide context and nuance to the data.
Empowering Communities through Data
There are substantial management hurdles to community data collection. Managing volunteers, coordinating meetings, and developing protocols and quality control all take time and money. Speaking of money, such projects can face difficulty in finding ongoing funding. Funders may not understand or value the ongoing work of community collected data, or may not believe the benefit is worth the cost. And as government priorities shift, agencies may begin collecting data that makes community collected data redundant.

However, in the right circumstances, community mapping can be a vital source of information for community members to understand what is occurring in their own neighborhood. The experience interacting with and handling data collection or validation can provide community members with a sense of agency and control over research being conducted in their neighborhood. Creating or augmenting existing data is a source of power in decision-making processes.

In the future, it is possible that community collected data could be vital in shedding light on some of the most pressing questions about our neighborhoods where data are scarce, such as evictions and displacement. Increasingly, data about communities is collected and used to power automated decision-making processes. Developing the tools for communities to create and understand their own data can give them power over how their own stories are told.
-Mychal Cohen Want to learn more? Sign up for the Data@Urban newsletter.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Community Mapping - Building Power and Agency with Data

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Data for Black Lives conference, held in January at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, highlighted the many ways in which data interact with the lives of black people. From facial recognition technology to algorithms that predict criminal risk, data and technology can often feel like an unseen and unfamiliar force used to criminalize and disempower black people.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.communityscience.com/knowledge4equity/AssetMappingToolkit.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
NOTE: This page is participatory! Double click on the wall to bring up a new box and add links/pdfs/ideas of your own.

# data[].attributes.headline
YPAR Curriculum from The Institute for Community Research

# data[].attributes.subject
YPAR Curriculum from The Institute for Community Research

# data[].attributes.body
Useful handouts and activities from Healthy People Families Youth based out of Oregon.gov

# data[].attributes.body
"A global network of young people making real change"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A global network of young people making real change

# data[].attributes.body
This is a globally-sourced overarching project guide to YPAR from the Youth Activism Project.

# data[].attributes.body
In PAR, those most impacted by an area of inquiry come together as a research collective to define for themselves the research question and the research design, collect data, analyze data, and decide together what should be done with the results. (Madeline Fox, 2015)

Youth-led Participatory Action Research (YPAR) is based in social justice principles and includes training for and conducting of systematic research to improve the lives of students, school, and/or communities.

Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR) stands on the belief that youth are the most important researchers and change-makers of their own lives. YPAR projects are interdisciplinary and may investigate local social justice issues, reveal historically significant events, or document issues in a school to create change. YPAR can create ways for teachers to facilitate and encourage students to lead, to develop the multiple literacies that shape their lives.

# data[].attributes.body
http://publicscienceproject.org/
Videos, current projects, training institutes, resources, and more.
Includes the short "What's Your Issue" YPAR video clip.

PRINCIPLES for Critical Participatory Action Research:

The following principles and commitments guide our collaborations, in the hope of maximizing participation within our PAR projects. Across our work we agree:

· To value knowledges that have been historically marginalized and delegitimized (i.e., youth, prisoner, immigrant) alongside traditionally recognized knowledges (i.e., scholarly).

· To share the various knowledges and resources held by individual members of the
research collective, across the collective, so members can participate as equally as possible.

· To collaboratively decide appropriate research questions, design, methods and analysis as well as useful research products.

· To create a research space where individuals and the collective can express their multiplicity and use this multiplicity to inform research questions, design and analyses.

· To encourage creative risk-taking in the interest of generating new knowledge (i.e., understanding individuals and the collective to be “under construction” with ideas and opinions that are in formation, expected to grow, etc.).

· To attend theoretically and practically to issues of power and vulnerability within the collective and created by the research. To strategically work the power within the group when necessary to benefit both individual and collective needs/agendas

· To excavate and explore disagreements rather than smooth them over in the interest of consensus (as they often provide insight into larger social/political dynamics that are informing the data).

· To use a variety of methods to enable interconnected analyses at the individual, social, cultural, and institutional levels.

· To conceive of action on multiple levels over the course of the PAR project.

· To think through consequences of research and actions.

· To an ongoing negotiation of conditions of collaboration; building research relationships over-time.

# data[].attributes.body
(full text on pdf...we read from chapter 2

# data[].attributes.body
"Complete the Image" exercise and more. Experiment with physicality and practicing consent, reflect about observation, interpretation, and choosing our actions.

# data[].attributes.body
The Emerging Twin Cities (TC) YPAR Collective. This is a participatory play list. When you find or make a video that you think contributes to our collective knowledge of YPAR (from getting started to defining an issue, investigating, or action), please add it. Add music too!
Find us on Facebook and ask to join: www.facebook.com/TCYPAR/